^ 



'oOU206 893A 



Hollinger 

pH 8.5 

Mill Run F3..1719 



■^u 



ast ana Ufe$t Jer 
im €ontr 



By !5l:V. OSCAI^ M. V00RHEE5 



%^";f-'V ■-.;■;• v'V S; ^•<^:5>y:r' 'jfivii^^i^- / 



CM 

east and (Ue$t Jersey Boundary Cine 

Controversy. 



READ AT THE SEMI-ANNUAL MEETING OF THE 



Hunterdon County Historical Society 



.AT.... 



three Bridges, Hew 3er$ey, August 20tb, 1902, 



By REV. OSCAR M. VOORHEES. 

It 



FLEMINGTON, N. J. 

H. E. Deats. 

1906. 



1 '■■ O < 



i 






Three hundred copies reprinted from the 

Hunterdon County Democrat for H. E. 

Deats, April, 1906, by Anthony Killgore, 

Publisher. 



Outline. 



Xew Jersey deeded to the Duke of York, March r2th, 1664. 

Transferred to Berkley and Cartaret, June 24th, 1664. 

Boundaries of the tiaiisfer quoted. 

Philip Cartaret commissioned as (!iovernor, Feb. 10th, 1664, and character of 
the government. 

The first di\ision line, July 29th, 1674, from Barnegatt to Renkokas. 

Scf-ond division line. July 1st, 1670, in famous " indenture quintipartite," 
Cartaret of the t.rst part, and Billings, Penn, Lawry and Lucas of the second 
part ; Little Egg Harbor the south partition point, and the northernmost branch 
of Delaware at latitude 41 degrees 40 minutes the North Partition point. 

Cartaret's death, Oct. 16th, 1680, and sale of East Jersey to twelve proprie- 
tors Feb. 1st, 1682. 

Reasons for drawing division line. 

New York also interested ; and Council Governors, June 30th, 1686. 

Northern Partition point to be determined and surveyors appointed. 

Agreement of (rovernors Barclay and Byllinge (in England) Sept. 14th, 1686, 
to submit the line to arbitration. 

The '■ Greenland " bond and award Jan. 8th, 1687, line to be run from Little 
Egg Harbor " North Northwest and fifty minutes more westerly." 

Line run by George Keith from Egg Harbor to South Branch of Raritan in 
1687 violently objected to by ^^'est Jersey proprietors. 

Letter of GoA'ernor Coxe Sept. 5th, 1687. 

Reply of East Jersey proprietors. 

The Coxe-Barclay compromise agreement. London, Sept. 5th, 1688. 

Effect of the agreement, which remained in force Avithout question for thirty 
3'ears. 

Question re-opened 1718, and " quintipartite line" demanded. 

New Y^ork and New Jersey line again. 

Act of March, 1718, for " running and ascertaining the line." 

Royal confirmation of act required. 

The Lords Commissions of Trade and Plantations " approved Dee. .5th. 1728. 

The PriA'j' Council approves May 22d, 1729. 

The effect of tliese delays. 

Instructions given to John Lawrence to rim the line in 1743. 

Why it ran through Pennsylvania. 

Its slight value and reasons therefor. 

No report of it foiuid in State Archives at Trenton. 



The East and West Jersey Boundary Line 

Controversy. 



Head before the Huuteidnu County Historical Society, August 20, 1!)()2. by Rev. 

Oscar M. \'oorhees. 

It is presumed that all the members of this .Society are awaie thai we are 
standing very near to the line that divides or did divide East New Jersey from 
West New Jersey in the days when such a dividing line was deemed of particular 
importance. I shall not be judged in error, I trust, if I venture the further pre- 
sumption that most of us have only a general idea respecting tiie long continued 
controversy that raged respecting the location of tliat line, and of the importance 
attached to its proper determination. If 1 am in error, I am tlie principal 
sufferer, for I have been at considi-rable pains to construct from originil sources 
a narrative of the controver.sy, for the completion of which I have had to search 
many volumes of New Jersey Archives, the pages of Leaming and Spicer, the 
records of the New Jersey Geological Survej', and much general New Jersey 
history. If, however, you are interested and but a little informed, I shall not 
count my labor in vain. 

An examination of the grants, letters, patent, etc., by which the territory which 
we now know as the folate of New Jersey was transferred from one jmrty to 
another brings out some startling facts respecting the value then placed ujjon it. 

Charles II. deeded to his " dearest brother." James Duke of York, the territory 
from " St. Croix next adjoining to New Scotland " to the Keenebeck and Long 
Island and the land from the Hudson to the Delaware River for a yearly return 
of " fortv beaver skins when thev sliall be demanded, or within ninetv davs after." 
(1). ■ 

But as the duty of governing the territory thus transferred was included in 
the grant, perhaps the price was suflicient. This grant or patent was executed 
March 12, 1664. Three months later, or, to be exact, the 24th of June, 1664, 
James transferred to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, the consideration 
being a yearly payment of "twenty nobles (thirty-three dollars) lawful money of 
England, if the same shall be lawfully demanded at or in the Inner Temple Hall. 
London, at the feast of St. iVlichael the Archangel, yearly," a portion of his 
American possessions. Axhich is described as follows : 

" All that tract of land adjacent to New England, and lying and being to tht 
westward of Long Island, and ]\Ianhitas Island, and bounded on the east part b\ 
the main sea. and part by Hudson's River, and hath upon the west Delaware baj 
or river, and extendeth southward to the main ocean as far as Cape ilay at the 

1, Leaming & Spicer ]). 4 and following. 



6 

nioutli of Dehiwaii' bay ; and to tlie nurtliwaid as tar as the iioitlieiiiiost branch 
of the said bay or river Deh^ware, which is forty-one degrees and forty minutes 
of latitude, and crossetli over thence in a straight line to Hudson's river, in 
forty-one degrees of latitude ; which said tract of land is hereafter to be called 
b}' the name or names of Xew Caeserea. or new Jersey •' * "" "■ '■' in as full 
and ample manner as the same is granted to the said Duke of York by the befori 
recited letters patent." (2). 

To make the story of this transfer complete we nuist add that this territory 
had been leased on the day previous to the date of the release heiein in part 
recited to the said Berkeley and Cartai-et for one year from the first day of May 
previous *" under tJie rent of a |)epper corn." Our Lords Proprietors. Bei'keley 
and Carteret ^\ere not s]o\\- in giving evidence of tlieir purpose to hold and 
govern their New Jersey possessions, for- even before the title thereof had been 
secured, it would seen), they issued a document thus entitled : 

" The Concessions and Agreement of the Lords Proprietors of the Province of 
Xew Caesarea or New Jersey to and with all and every the Adventurers and all 
such as shall settle and plant there." (3). 

This document i)rovides for the appointment by themselves of a Governor 
(who was given power to appoint his Council) a Secretary and a Surveyor 
General, and an Assembly to be chosen by the inhabitants. The powers granted to 
the Governor Council and Assembly are very liberal. In fact the whole instrument 
shows a l)road minded desire for the development of the province. The conunis- 
sion of Philip Carteret as Governor, and the lettei- of instruction to him and his 
Council of the same date were e.\;ecuted February 10th, 1(5(54. Thus we find the 
Lords Proprietors apparently issuing their instructions nearly three months 
previous to the date of their lease of the Province, and even thirty days before the 
jiroperty had been transferred to James by Charles II. But the difference between 
the legal year, which began the 2;'ith of ^Farch. and the historic year may account 
for this apparent haste, and so discover that the events mentioned followed one 
another in regular and proper order. It is well known that settlements had lieen 
effected before the dates we have been considering and that there was considerable 
friction in establishing the new government, and maintaining its authority. This 
led to the issuing of a number of confirming and restraining documents, all of 
which appear on the pages of Leaming and S])icer. But as they do not affect the 
controversy under consideration, we ])ass on to the particular matter in hand. 

The first documentary evidence of a division of the Province between the 
proprietors appears in a new grant made July 20, 1(574, by James to Sir George 
(Jarteret, in which the southern boundary line of his portion is drawn in a 
straight line from "' a certain creek called Bainegatt. being about the middle 
between Sandy Point and Cape May * * * '^ to a certain creek in Delaware 
river, next adjoining to and below a certain creek in Delaware River called 
Renkokus Kill'." (4). 

While no mention is made of the fact, the natural presumption is that the 
territory south of this line \\as considered as the peculiar property' of Berkeley, 
or of the company of Quakers to whom he had sold his share of the Province. But 
this fact does not appear in the next instrument that shall command attention, the 

2. Leaming & Spicer p. 8 and following. 

3. Leaming & Spicer p. 12 and following. 

4. Leaming & Spicer p. 40 and following. 



famous (juiiitipaitite dt'i-d of division of July 1st, ]()7(). This is a foriuidable and 
voluminous document, and oc'c-ui)ies twelve pages of Learning and Spicer. (5) 
Tliis instrument, after recounting at length the patent of Charles 11. to James, 
and of James to Berkeley and Carteret, states that on :March 18, 1()73, "the said 
John. Lord Berkeley, lor and in consideration of the sum of one thousand 
pounds ■"■ '" * ■"' did grant, baigain, sell and convey unto the said John 

l-'enwiek. ins heirs and assigns, all that the moiety or half part of him, the said 
John Berkeley of and in the said tract of land and premises .-o to be or then 
called by the names of New Caesarea or New Jersey," etc., etc.; and further that 
eleven months later, i. e. on Februaiy 10th and 11th, 1G74, John Fenwick trans- 
ferred by a so-called tripartite deed to Edward Billinge of the second part and 
William" Penn. (4a wen Lawry and Nicholas Lucas of the third part the share 
secured by him from Berkeley. The money consideration involved in this last 
transfer is not stated, except that the Quaker purchasers obligate themselves to 
pay one-half of the twenty nobles due "■ yearly and every year to James. Duke of 
Vork." 

But all thi.s is preliminary to the main intent of the instrument, which was 
devised and executed to gi\e bounds to the portion which should hereafter belong- 
to Carteret, and the other portion which had become the property of Billinge, 
Penn, Lawry and Lucas. The line from Barnegatt to Rankokas was entirely dis- 
regarded, and a new^ one established, beginning at the point on the Delaware 
\\here the northern boundary line of the province touches that river at the 
northernmost branch, forty-one degrees and forty minutes latitude, " now by the 
consent and agreement of the said parties to these presents, called and agreed to 
l)e called the nortli partition ])oint, and from thence, that is to say, from the 
said north partition jjoint extending southward by a straight and direct line, 
drawn from the said north partition southward through the said tract of land 
unto the nios't southwardly point of the said east side of Little Egg Harbour 
aforesaid; which said most southardly point of the east side of Little Egg Har- 
bour is now by the consent and agreement of the said parties to these presents, 
called and agreed to be from henceforth called the south partition point, and which 
said straight and direct line dra\\ni from the said north partition point thro' the 
said tract of land, unto the said south partition point, is now by the consent and 
agreement to the parties to these jjrcsents called and agreed to be called the line 
of partition, which is the line hereinbefore mentioned to be intended, by the said 
consent and agreement of the said parties, for the dividing and making a parti- 
tion or separation of the said easterly part, share and portion, from the westerly 
])art. share and portion of the said tract of land and premises." 

Three pages follow in order to make sure to Sir George his full title to the 
portion of the province herein in part described and bounded, " to be henceforth 
called, known and distinguished by the name of East New Jersey" so far as the 
four Quakers could make it sure by relinquishing for themselves, their heirs and 
:;ssigns, any riglit, title, interest or profit in the tract or parcel of land. A like 
))ortion confirms on the ))art of Sir Ceorge to the Quakers their title to the other 
portion of the Province to be known as West New Jersey, the sum of five shillings 
i)eing named in each case as sufficient equivalent. Thus for all time it w^ould seem 
East New Jersey and West New Jersey are established as to their '' metes and 
bounds " by the said partition line as thus described in the said " indenture 

.■). Learning & Spicer p. 01 and following. 



(juiiitipaiiitc. made tlic lii-st day of July Auiio Doiuiui KiTU."' 

So far as we know this ayreeiueiit wa.s n'at-lied without serious difficulty or 
dispute. The partition points were no doubt loeated easily enoixgh upon some 
map ( () )at hand, and it scarcely occurred to the parties to the agreement that 
there would be much difficulty in drawing a line, the termini of which were so 
particulai'ly described and located. 

l'"()nr years after the signing of the ([uintip ntitc dci tl Sir George Carteret 
died (l(i October, HiSO) and by his will his N'ew Jersey possessions, among 
others, wei'c de\ised to a number of Trustees for the beuetit of his creditors. 
These Trustees sold F^ast Jersey at public sale to William Penn and eleven asso- 
ciates for three thousand four hundred pounds. Their deeds of lease and release 
were dated February 1st and 2nd, ]()S1-S2. (7) Subseipiently each of them .sold 
one-half of his resjiective right to a new associate, making in all twenty-four 
proprietors. The Duke of York the following year confirmed this sale to the 
proprietors, and from this time until 1701 the proprietors and their successors 
were in full control. They were anxious to dispose of portions of their posse.s- 
sions and encouraged emigration, and the lands that proved most attractive were 
soon located and large tracts actuilly sold. As this partition line was frequently 
mentioned as part of the lioundaries of tracts thus located or sold, it early became 
desirable that it be carefully run. It was not long before disputes arose between 
contending owners from Kast and \\'est .Jersey, which led to an urgent demand 
for accurate knowledge. In the instructions to Gawen Lawry, who was sent out 
in 1()8.3 as (lovernor of East Jersey we find the following: 

""iX. ^^'(^ desire he may mike all needful ])i'eparation towards drawing the 
Line of Division.between us and ^Vest Jersey, that it may be done as soon as possi- 
ble it can: and that in the interim to take what information he can, where it 
will fall, so that we may have a certain acco\int both of the breadth and length 
of the Province, and of the quantity of land that is in it, and of the natiire of 
the soil and conveniency of those back ])arts of it whereof we have not yet so par- 
ticular an account." ( 1-1 ) . 

As the northeiii partition ]ioint was the terminus of the line dividing New 
Jersey from New York, that Prf)vince was also interested in the matter. At a 
Cauncil held in Fort James in Xew Y'ork, June 30, IGSO, the Deputy Governors 
of Xew York, Fast Jersey and ^^'est Jersey were all present with memi)ers of their 
Council, and tlie Xew Jersey contingent informed Gov. Dougan of Xew Y'ork of 
their intention to lun the lines of the three governments, I (jiiote the minute as 
follows : 

"To this he assented and ])i()i)o-e(l to them tint the most northerly bnnch of 
Delaware Kiver according to the Patent, should fir.st be agreed upon and fixed: 
that the first day of Sept. next after the date hereof be the day appointed for 
the surveyors to meet at the Falls of Delawai'e River, and that which is the most 
northerly branch of Delaware River (if any controversy arise about it) be de- 
termined by the vote of two of these three surveyors, George Keith, Andrew 
Robinson and Philip Wells; that what is concluded by two of the said surveyors 
to be the limits and bounds of the three governments be so deemed and reputed: 

(). See G.ologieal Survey of X. J. Vol. 1 (1888) p. 42. 

7. Hist, of Hunterdon and Sonjcrst-t Counties page 21 f. 

8. Xew Jersey Archives ^'ol. I. p, 428, 



9 

and the .surveyoVM to give in their reports under their hands." (9) 

In the instructions given to Philip Wells, the .'Purveyor of New York, the fol- 
lowing appears. "Vou are carefully and with exactness to run the line between 
this province and that of East Jersey, beginning in the latitude of forty-one 
degrees and forty minutes upon Delaware River." (10) Had this point been fixed 
upon, much subsequent controversy might have been avoided. But as it appeared 
that there was no northernmost branch of the River at latitude forty-one degrees 
and forty minutes, or in fact, very near to it, a beginning from that direction could 
not be readily made. The matter was under consideration at the same time among 
the proprietors in England, for it appears that fourteen days after the time 
appointed for the meeting of surveyors at the falls of Delaware, i. e., Sept. 14. 
1()8G. we find (tO\'. Barclay of f^ast Jersey and Gov. Byllinge of West .Jersey en- 
tering into an agreement to submit the matter of the East and West Jersey 
division line to arbitration. 1 quote part of the agreement: 

''Whereas the said Provinces of East and West New Jersey lye contiguous to 
each other, and the line bovmds of either are not yet fully known, whereby the 
inhabitants of the said respective provinces are, or may be, prejudiced in their 
settlements, and the respective governors thereof be in doubt liow far their juris- 
dictions extends. )ioir kiioir ye that for remedy of tlie inconveniences above men- 
tioned and of all other difficulties that may arise by reason of the uncertainty of 
the just limitts of both the said provinces, a Division shall he made of the said 
Provinces by ^leithes and Bounds at the Ecpial Charge of Both the Said provinces, 
and to that End do hereby order and Direct the Respective Deputy Governors 
for the time being of the said provinces Respectively to Nominate and oppoint 
within one month next after their receipt of these presents, or as soon after as 
may be three persons or more not exceeding five. Being Inliabitants of Each 
province whereof the Surveyor General of each province or their deputys shall be 
two and three persons of each province at least shall be present for The making 
Such divisions, and That The persons So to be nominated shall as soon as they can 
|>roceed to make as equal a Division of the Said provinces as they can according 
to the Best of their Judgment and Skill, and That where it may be Conveniently 
done they Shall make Rivers and other the most notorious places The boundaries 
of each jirovince, and if any disadvantage in quantity of l^and in the Judginent 
of the persons appointed to make Sucli Division, arise to either province by 
making either Rivers or other Remarkable places the Boundaries thereof, the 
persons who Sliall make Such division Shall have power, and are hereby author- 
ized to appoint Such a Compensation in Land, to Such province whicli hath the 
Disadvantage as mav be Consistent with the preservation of the Division that 
Shall be made by Them." ( 11 ) 

In this agreement we find the governors authorizing a departure from the 
straight line between the two determined points, and encouraging the acceptance 
of rivers, and perhaps also mountains as proper boundary lines. I am inclined 
to think that this was done that a portion of the Millstone, the Raritan and its 
North Branch might enter into the divisional line. But whatever may have been 
their object, the agreement was to that extent on its face revolutionary. 

Following this agreement, and to make the outcome the more certain, seven 

9. New Jersey Archives Vol. I, p. .517. 

10. New Jersey Archives Vol. I. p. .lis. 

11. New .Tersey Archives "N'ol. T. ]i ."iin. 



10 

proprietors and i^habitallt^s of ^^'est Jersey sign a lioiul in tlie sum of o.OOO 
pounds to abide by the award of the arbitrators. The signers were John .Skein. 
Deputy Gov. Samuel Jennings, Thomas Olive, George Hutchinson, ^Nlahlon Stacy. 
Thomas Lambert and Joseph Pope. It is presumed also that the East Jersey 
proprietors signed a like bond. As the award was made at the home of Henry 
Greenland of Piscataway, and as he was one of tlie witnesses tliereto. tlio decision 
was afterwards referred to as the Greenland award. Its date was .lanuu\- S. 
1GS6-7. (12). 

On this same day the award of the arbitratoi's, John Reid and William iMnlry. 
was signed, tliough I can hardly believe that the contents of their awaid was 
known to the signers of the Greenland bond. If they knew the terms of the award, 
they were certainly ignorant of the position of the line, for it would pass within 
seven miles of the falls of the Delaware, and loiu-h that river far soutli of lati- 
tude forty-one degrees, forty minutes. 

Here is the award : 

■■ Whereas the go\ernors and pioprietors of East and \Vest Jersey lias wholly 
leferred ye division lyne of ye two provinces to us (as by their bonds doth appear) 
That is to say given us full i)ower to nui ye Same as we think lltt. Therefore we 
do hereby declare that it shall run from ye north side of ye mouth or Inlett of ye 
beach of Little }'jgg Harbor on a straight lyne to Delaware river north north west 
and fiftj' minutes more westerly according to naturall position and not according 
to ye magnet whose variation is nine degrees westward. 

Witness our hands this Eighth day of January. 1686-7. 

JOHN REID. 

WILLIAM EMLEY." (13) 

It is impossible at this time to be sure what was the animus of this award. If 
it was made by taking the data furnished by an incorrect map, and the straight 
line run the direction indicated was supposed to terminate at the " north partition 
point," their ignorance is in part excusable, though the failure to mention said 
point as the northern terminus seems inexcusable. We hesitate to charge them 
with partiality to East Jersey, even though a letter of James Alexander, later 
Surveyor General of both East and West Jersey, might seem to justify such a 
cliarge. Here is a part of the letter wherein the award is spoken of as being " a 
thing very ridiculous in itself, when the quintipartite deed was in force. It 
occasioned much confusion in New Jersey, till the New Jersey act of 1718 rectified 
all. * * * * * But though it was awarded and run by George Keith from 
Egg Harbour to John Dobie's, yet it was never run further, and was clamoured 
against at once by West Jersey with very good reason." (14). 

This quotation takes us forward too rapidly with our story, so we will have 
to go back to the award made Jan. S. 1687. This proved indeed a beginning of the 
effort to locate the line. George Keith, then Surveyor General, proceeded that 
same year to Little Egg Harbour and established the south partition point where 
it remains to this day. He then followed the course indicated by the award some 
60 miles until he reached the South Branch of the Raritan at the western bounds 
of John Dobie's ^plantation. Whatever of remonstrance and opposition from the 

12. New Jersey Archives Vol. I. p 522. 

13. New Jersey Archives Vol. I, p. 523. 

14. New Jersey Archives Vol. I, p. 524. 



11 

\\ est Jciscy Piopriplors Keith may have met along tlie route of the survey, we 
may not know, hut when he emerged \ipon tlie Raritan he had evidence that he 
was within the territory claimed hy East Jersey, for the point reached was in the 
j)ossession of tlie said Dohie, he liaving pnrcliased hut three years previous from 
.lolm Camphell. son of Lord Neill Camphell of Scotland, one-cpiai'ter of his 
1-Sth of l-24th part of East New Jersey. ( >See East Jersey Deeds, Liher A., Page 
210.) 

One might be led to surmise that this plantation was situated on the south side 
of the South Branch, from its mention in the running of a line that did not cross 
that stream. But this appears not to have been the case, for John Dobie's prop- 
erty was located along tlie north side of the stream ex'tending from beyond the 
mouth of the Neshanic to nearly the spot where we are standing,* and contained 
375 acres. t 

Long- before the surveyors reached the river it became evident that they were 
pursuing a course that \\ould reach the l^elaware very far south of forty-one, 
degrees, forty minutes. This led to decided opposition to the continuance of the 
survey, and Keith seems not to have persisted. During the winter of 1G87 and 
^'le following summer, the controversy waxed warm, botli in this country and in 
England. There was a meeting of the Proprietors in London at which Dr. Daniel 
Coxe appeared as the representative of West Jersey, he having virtually assumed 
the title and oflice of Governor, at which the entire matter was discussed. Tt was 
evident tliat the East Jersey Proprietors saw their advantage resulting from the 
$.1,000 bond, and proposed to continue running the line according to the award 
of the arbitrators or sue for the face of the bond. A long letter written by Coxe 
to tlie ^Vest Jersey Proprietors who were living in the province gives his side of 
the ccmtroversy in detail, and indicates how ditficult was his task. But he stood 
manfully by the quintipartite line and declared that of Keith manifestly unjust 
to West Jersey. His final appeal is, " Stand by the letter of the agreement 
* """ ■ * that the line be run directly from the East side of Little ]"]gg 
Harbour, unto the most northerly branch of Delaware River in forty-one degrees, 
forty minutes; and I question not but we shall bring them to more reasonable 
terms than any they have hitherto proposed ; at least no pains nor cost shall be 
wanting on my part, and T have the concurrence of all our proprietors, Mr. Penn 
excepted, whom 1 could any \\ays meet with or consult. And whereas I am very 
credibly informed that the proiirietors of East Jersey liave ordered lands to be 
taken up in divers places near the new pretended line of partition ; that having 
possession, upon a re\iew, they may have a more spacious claim: If any attempt 
of this nature be made, I do not only protest against it. but request and desire that 
all the inhabitants of West Jersey do the same ; and at the same time the surveyor 
of West Jersey, or his deputy, do immediately take up in my name, all that land 
which is westerly of the Millstone and Raritan river which was not actually in 
possesion of East Jersey at the time of their pretended award between Mr. Emley 
and Reid * "" * * * I shall add one more thing, which seemeth to me of the 
greatest consequence : I beseech you let there be no animosity or indignation, 
severe censure, or spightful reflections on those who gave their consent unto the 
award made by ICmley. (i. e., those who had signed the bond) : For my part, I 

"" This paper was read at Three Bridges in the Reformed Church of which the 
writer was pastoi 

jHistory of Hunterdon and Somerset Counties, page 756. 



12 

iiin fully satistii'd with the lionesty and fairness of their intentions : hut the best 
of men may l)e overreaehed hy camning, (h'signing ))ersons ; forget wlrat is ])ast, 
:;nd live together as liecomes ehristians, and neighlims and eountrymen." ( IT)). 

This letter was sent lunler date of Se])tenil)er "itli. KiST. and gives proof that 
tin controvt'rsy over the award began even while the sur\eyor was at work, if not 
lu'fori-. 

Wliile from this letter the right seems to be with Coxe and the West Jersey 
l)ro])rietors. we are not to eonsider the matter ready for decision until the other 
:-ide is heard, and their contention we find set forth in an unsigned letter evidently 
written about the same time by some East .Jersey Proprietors to Wm. Dockwra & 
Co. of London. Therein it is claimed that as at the latitude forty-one degrees, 
forty minutes no northernmost branch of Delaware could be founcl. — a creek or 
stream not being accepted as a "branch." — theiefore the (luintipartite line must be 
of necessity disi-egarded. And as the (h'eenlands a\vard was made after an agree- 
ment to submit the line to arbitration, and a bond given to prove good faith and 
insure comjjliance. therefore that award should be coTisidered final, and the 
Keith line extended to the Delaware be the dividing line. ( 10.) 

This argument Dr. C'oxe found it dilliciUt to meet, but intimated a willingness 
to allow tlu' line run to Dobie's to stand provided some portion of North Jersey 
rist of the line as extended be allowed to West Jersey. So much he suggested in 
the letter above rpioted in ])art. Ho\v many meetings and discussions followed 
we may not know, but as a settlement was not reached mitil Sept. 5, 1GS8, just 
one year after the Coxe letter was written, it is pretty evident that much of the 
time was thus occupied. But as a c()m])romise resulted, perhaps we should not 
condemn the parties to the controversy. While the agreement that resulted is 
rather long, for the sake of delinitcness perha])s we should have it entire. 

London, September 5. 1()S8. 

" It is agreed this day by Dr. Daniel Coxe. Oovernor of the Province of West 
Jersey, on l)ehalf of himself, and all the rest of the proprietors of that province. 
on the one part, ami Robert Barclay, governor of the i)io\ince of East Jersey, on 
liehalf of himself and all the rest of the jiroprietors of that province, on the other 
part, as followeth, viz.: 

" For the final determination of all ditlereuces concerning the deed of pirtition. 
■nil all other disputes and controversies about di\iding the lands, and settling the 
liounds between East and West Jersey. 

" 1. The line of partition run straight from little Egg Harbour, to the most 
westerly corner of John Dol)ie's ]ilantation. as it stands on the south branch of 
Rariton river, shall be the bounds so far between East and West Jersey, and shall 
not be altered, but remain as it stands on a printed draught of the proprietors 
hnids. surveyed in East Jersey, and drawn by John Reid and since printed here. 

"•2. From thence to run along the luck of the adjoining plantations, untill it 
comes to James Dundass his plantation ; and from thence, at the most northwest- 
erly part thereof, a line to lie down on the back of those plantations, and so to 
nm northeastward, till it touch the north branch of R niton river, as it is struck 
upon the ma]i already : but saving the plantations already laid out. to be within 
the line, if they happen to stand a little more westerly than that line is marked. 

" .3. From ttie north end of the line where it touches North I'ranch ; thence 

1.1. New Jersey Archives Vol. II. p 1(1 following. 
](). New Jersey Archives Vol. II. p. IS following. 



1,5 

forward tlie largest stream or current of water belonging to tlie said Xortli 
branch, sball be the bound or partition; and so continuing along the same, until 
the north end thereof, for the bounds so far. 

" 4. From the said north end of the branch, a short straight line to run to 
touch the nearest ]iart of the Passaick river ; and so following the course of that 
river, continuing Poquanick river, so long as it runs northerly or northwesterly ; 
those rivers still to be the bounds between both piovinces ; and if Pofjuanick river 
do not run far enough to the latitiule of forty-one degrees, then from the said 
river to a straight line to be run northward to the latitude; and that to be the 
utmost iiorth partition point and from the said ])oint in a straight line due east 
to the partition point on Hudson's river beween East Jersey and New York ; pro- 
vided al\\ays that all plantations and tracts of land, laid out and surveyed, 
before this agreement arrives in East Jersey, shall remain to the parties concerned; 
and the partition shall so run as to include them within East Jersey bounds. 

" Lastly, Dr. Coxe doth covenant and ]3romise, to make good the agreements 
above written and warrant the title and (piiet possession of all the lands so to be 
appropriated to the proprietors of East Jersey, according to the limits and bounds 
above mentioned, against all persons that shall or may pretend, or claim any 
interest to any of the said lands, as West Jersey Proprietors. And Robei-t 
Barclay doth covenant and promise to 7uake good the agreement above written, 
and warrant the ([uiet title and possession of lands, so to be appropriated, to the 
pro])rietors of West Jersey, according to the limits and bounds above mentioned, 
against all persons that shall or may pretend or claim any interest to any of the 
said lands, as East Jei'sey Proprietors : For performance of all and every the 
lespective articles and covenants herein mentioned ; they do mutually bind 
themselves each to the other in the sum of five thousand pomids. to be well and 
truly paid on the breach of any of the clauses and covenants, herein before men- 
tioned. Tn witness whereof, they have interchangeably set their hands and seals, 
tlie dav and vear first above written. 

ROBERT BARCLAY." (17.) 
DAVID HEWLING 
STEPHEN LUCOCK. 

It might seem from the terms of this instrument that the controversy was at 
an end. for the governors not only sign the agreement willingly but show their 
good faitli V)y executing the bond in the simi of 5,000 pounds. But 
'■ The best laid plans of mice and men 
gang aft aglee." 

And so it pioved in tliis case. 

Just how the East Jersey proprietors felt when they learned the terms of the 
agreement I have no means of knowing. Perhaps they were pleased because it 
confirmed to them all that fine tract of the Raritan valley now comprised in the 
western half of Somerset Co. This tract had been taken up only a few years 
]irevious to the Greenland award and possession being deemed prima facie evi- 
dence of rightful title, the line was made to run to the rear or west of their plan- 
tations, and while it gave a large part of Northern Jersey to West Jersey, that 
territory being ruggecl and as yet unappropriated was but lightly valued. 

As to the ^^'est Jersey proprietors, we can imagine their smile of satisfaction 

17. New Jersey Archives Vol. II, p. 34 following. 



14 

Mhen tluy learned of tlie award. It is true they liad lost a gore, according to their 
own reckoning, alxnit ten miles wide at the north, the sides of which were about 
sixty miles long, hiit length did not count so much, for the lines converged at the 
south p:\rtition point. Tiie country to the north was theirs — all of Hunterdon as 
now bounded, of Warren. Sussex. ]\]orris. and part of Passaic and Bergen, and well 
mav they lia^e felt satisfied, for our (k^ological Survey tells us that of the 7.795 
s(|."mi. of area witliin the bounds of the State, West Jersey received 5,40:5 to East 
.Ji'ir^vy's -^.-.W-I s([. mi. — nearl\ two-ihirds of the whole. "(Vol. 1 (1888) p. 00). 
For ma])s illustrating this division see above report, page 92. 

The line thus laid down by (oxe and Barclay has entered largely into the 
permanent lines of the State. From its establishment it was recognized as the line 
of division between Burlington in West Jersey and the organized counties of 
^lonmouth. .Middlesex and Somerset in Ea.st Jersey. And this recognition was 
establislied wlien in 1709 the bounds of the counties were more fully defined. 
When in 1714 Hunterdon was formed, its eastern boundary was the line determined 
upon between C'oxe and Barclay, and witli tlie exception of the short portion 
running ea.st and west where it divides Ihuitirdon fiom Bergen, that line is tlie 
establislied county or township boundary to this day. 

We might judge that the boundary controversy was ended — this being the 
desire and intention of both parties. But it is one thing to sit down in a London 
apartment and make an agreement and a very dirt'erent thing to insure the 
acceptance of that agreement for all time, especially when the property in 
([uestion is a moiuitainous region three th:)usund miles distant, as yet in large part 
unknown and unsurveyed. However, it was some satisfaction to Coxe and 
Barclay to think, for a time at least, that their work met the approval of their 
associates, for it was aiiparently accejvtrd by all. 

This satisfaction apparently continued for thirty years. During these years 
other matters of im])ortance were occui)ying the attention of the people. The 
proprietary governments becoming dillicult and complicated, by reason of the 
multiplication of projirietors. were voluntarily relinquished to the crown, and the 
first Royal governor ap])eared in 1702 in the ])ers(m of Lord Cornbury. The 
country was fast filling u)) and new lands being occu])ied. It is estimated that at 
the beginnimi' of that ceirturv there were 12.000 inhabitants in East Jersey and 
8.000 in West Jersey. (X. J. Hist. Collect., p. 29). 

This coming in of new settlers was the cause of the reopening of the boundary 
controversy. The first reference to it that I have discovered appears in a letter 
written in 1718 by James Logan of Philadelphia to Geoi'ge Willocks, and two 
paragraphs of this letter will place the matter clearly before us. 

" The Council of Proprictc-s for the W'estern Division of Xew Jersey being 
informed at their meeting in Xovember last that the jiersons who had purchased 
lands in Whippening Xeck ha<l been disturbed by some proprietors of the Eastern 
Division, who on some late discovery claimed all the said neck as belonging to 
East Jersey, they took the whole matter into consideration. 

" The matter of controversy is the line from the Xorth Branch of Raritan 
to Passaiak River. This you would have Allametunck to Eockaway River, which 
last because it suits you best you would make your Passaiak. * "' * " (18). 

He proceeds to show the injustice of this claim by referring to the maps used 
by Coxe and Barclay in setting forth their agreement, and by calling to mind the 

18. X'cw Jersey Archives Vol. TV, p. .377 following. 



fact tliat Ea.st Jer^i'V ])iO])vi('tois hid laid out tract* bounded by the " Passiiak" 
a^ understood and chiinied by the West Jersey proprietors in this contention. 
Iiy which act they in virtue denied the validity of their present claim. " So.'' 
he continues. " however strongly Interest Sways I hope you will have too much 
honour ever to insist on this further." The use of the word " interest " gives the 
l<ey to the animus of the controversy, as anotlier sentence will indicate. " You 
alledge indeed that you ought to have one half of ye Province, but that you ha\e 
not by any divisio}i hitherto made." He. next asserts that there was a party in 
tlie Province " violently bent on standing by ye first Partition from Little Egg 
Harbour to ye northern ])oint on Delaware River commonly called the Quintipar- 
tite Line." And from a careful consideration of the whole subject he became 
convinced of the correctness of their contention. This is v;hat he says respecting 
the Coxe-Barclay .igreement : 

" It was therefore extremely absurd in tli(> two governors, and seems to be of a 
jiiece with the skill of the Draughtsman of ye last partition to imagine that any 
such thing lay in tlieir ])ower. These Western Proprietors alledge that this latter 
agreement was a contiivance of ye Eastern, who became sensible of their dis- 
advantage, which lias since a])peared more clearly since Delaware is found to bend 
so much to ye Eastern, that about Maghackamack it is not above thirty-four 
miles pr thereabouts from Hudson's River, which is known to nni very nearly due 
North and South, and therefore that tlie old Line will cut off to ye Eastern 
Division a much less portion than vras expected. As for my own part, I have 
always been of opinion, since 1 had any tolerable notion of the matter, that the 
case was much like those marriages, of which 'tis said, that they ought not to 
have been made, but since they are made, ought not to be broken. Both sides have 
broke so far in upon the first Division, the Eastein Proprietors first by extending 
their surveys westerlv' within about seven miles of Delaware near the Falls and 
ye Western in some measure in other places. Ther(4'ore the utmost confusion must 
arise, if all these are to ))e made void, and tlie peoi)le who honestly purchased 
under the Proprietors, and connnonly. I believe, with general warranties, must be 
distracted to the last degree. This I think we ouglit in regard to ye publick 
jieace, to endeavor by all reasonable means to prevent. But since I am persuaded 
it is more to your Interest on ye Eastern side to labour for this than it is theirs 
of the Western, you ought in my poor Judgment at least to Show yourSelves 
disposed to pursue it by ye most amicable measure, and with a Spirit different 
from the last you have taken. We may please our Selves with the thoughts of 
gaining present Advantages by Address and Skilful ^Management. But Lands and 
the Inheritance of them are of Such a nature that no man can be Secure of what 
may follow after that address and skill as to his part dies with him. * « * ■- 
In case we can come to terms of accommodation on the last Division, divers of us 
will use the best of our interest when we have an opportunity to promote on our 
parts an Act of Assembly for confiiniing that Division, otherwise we must return 
to the quinquepartite Deed, and then endeavor for an Act to Settle in ye best 
manner that may be, the former Purchasers in their Possession if that be jiracti- 
cable, (18) wch doubtless it is not without great Difliculty." (4 .381). 

This letter hints very strongly at the real cause of the controversy — the desire 
on the part of the various Proprietors Avho took up lands near to the division line 
to secure as large a share as possible. And as an increased knowledge of the ter- 
ritory showed its value, and also gave more correct ideas of the places through 
which the quintipartite line ^^■ould run if actually surveyed, proprietors often 



16 

desired or opposed it.s beiiiii run as their individual interests dictated. 

During this same period a controversy was raging between New York and New 
Jersey resi)ecting the line between the two Provinces. It will be remembered that 
the northernmost partition point of the liast and \\ est Jersey line on the north- 
ernmost branch of the Delaware at forty-one degrees, forty minutes was also to be 
the point to ^\•llich the straight line from Hudson's River at forty-one degrees was 
to run. Here too the meaning of the term " branch " needed to be made definite, 
and the question arose as to whether the " branch " should be disregarded or the 
exact latitude, as there was no tributary to the Delaware at the latitude named. 
The New York boundary controversy led to greater heat than did the one we are 
particularly discussing, as a letter from J-,ewis Morris, President of the Council 
of New Jersey, to the Lords of Trade, will show. He says : 

" The Ascertaining that partition line is Almost of Absolute necessity ; the 
few people that lidiabit, nigh some parts where its tSuppos'd t'will run, are con- 
tinually Quarreling ; they cut and carry away whole fields of corne, from Each 
other and do all the mischief they can, Short of killing one anotiier : and 1 
believe it will not be long before they come up to that. 

"The only thing they agree in, is not to pay any publique taxes, and the 
measures they take, render them as unable, as the}' are unwilling." (19). 

About a year previous to this writing of the Logan letter tlie New Yoik 
Assembly passed a law for running the division line and providing her share of tlu- 
cost. Tlie New Jersey Assembly passed a similar Act but failed to find a me<ui> 
of providing the necessary funds. But the same difficulty did not appear when 
the East and West Division A^ct came up. 

This Act. passed in ]\Iarch. 171S, is thus designated: 

" An Act for Running and Ascertaining the Line of Partition or Division be- 
tween the Eastern and VVestern Divisions of the Province of New Jersey and for 
preventing disputes for the future Concerning the same ; and for .Securing to the 
General Proprietors of the soil of each of the Divisions and Persons claiming 
imder them their Several and respective Possessions Rights and just claims." (20.) 

The provisions of this act for securing the rights and titles of the various 
proprietors are thus described by our friend Logan, who was a member of the 
Assembly, in a letter to Dr. Daniel Coxe under date of June 27, 1719. He says : 

"It was agreed that all ye Lands taken up by ye Eastern Proprietors on ye west 
side of ye Line should be still held in ye same right in ye same manner as if they had 
been taken up in ye Eastern Division, provided they did not exceed ye quantity that 
ye Western Proprs had taken up on ye East side of ye Line. The same Provision 
was made for the Lands of the Western Proprs and when ye quantities taken on 
ye wrong sides of ye Line respectively bj' the Proprs of both divisions were com- 
pared, ye Surplusage after two yrs allowed on both sides to buy rights, is to be 
taken ofT from ye unsettled Lands of the 2d & .3rd Dividends on ye Eastern side 
& from ye Lands of the -1th Dividend in ye Western side, or out of ye unsurvey'd 
Lands on either side if such can be found of value. Thus both sides are to have 
ye exact quantity they first purchased, and all ye settlers on both sides are made 
easy. * * * * 

" The Commissrs of N. Y'ork & N. Jersey are now actually out upon that 
Partition Line, and when the northern point on Delaware is fixed in Discovering 

19. New Jersey Archives Vol. TV. p. 4.39 following. 

20. New Jersey Archives Vol. V, p. 213 following. 



17 

of which there is a very good brass Instrument wth able artists employed we shall 
easily find how ye other line between the two Divisions is to run. * * * * 
The C'ommissrs for running the Line on their part are Jas Kirkbride and John 
Heading (ye old man is deceased) onye Eastern side Dr. Johnston & Geo. Wil locks 
are appointed who with J Alexandr & Jacob Taylor on our part & Jerrat for N 
York are now actually upon ye work." (21). 

Once again the matter is settled in so far as the Assembly could settle it. 
And though they gave much thought and care to the Act and took every precaution 
to conserve the rights of all it would be vain for them to think that tlierc would 
be no opposition to the jilan proposed. It seems evident that an early running of 
the line \\as expected. The X. York Commissioners were busy finding the north- 
west point, and tiie survevors were appointed to carrv into eflt'ect the provisions 
of the Act. 

But the" law's delays are proverbial and there is no earthly force that can make 
a monarch hasten when lethargy is his natural characteristic. This act was sent 
at once for the royal approval. But it must needs run the gauntlet of oflicial red 
tape. First the Lords Conunissioners of Trade and Plantations sat upon it, and 
so oflfectually tliat nearly ten years passed before signs of returning life appeared. 
Mr. West. " one of his late majesty's Council learned in the Law" was duly con- 
sulted, and upon his favoraljle report The Lords of Trade deliberately arose, and 
allowed the act to pass down the gauntlet one more step wdth this explanation : 

" This is an Act wherin private property is concern'd. And therefore we 
thought it would be of Service to let the same lye for some time, that in Case any 
Persons should l)e aggriev'd thereby they might have sufficient opportunity to lay 
their Objections before Us : But as we have received none, and As this Act will 
be of A<l\antage to the Inhabitants of New Jersey in General by settling their 
res])cctive Titles. We humbly lay the same before your INIajesty for your Royal 
Confirmation. 

\Yhich is most hundily Submitted 

P. DOE^IINIQUE ORL. O BRIDGEMAN 

M. BLADEN \Y. GARY 

THO: FRANKLAND. (20) 

Bear in mind that the act was passed in March, 171S, and that this approval 
was not granted until Dec. 5. 1728, ten years and eight months later, and you will 
get some idea of tlie methods of administration tliat prevailed in those far away 
days. 

But the gauntlet is not yet run, and our act is still " in transitu." The Lords 
of Trade are but common men. The men of blood, lineage, pedigree and foibles 
must act. Hence we must take one more peep within the councils of state. This 
is the record : 

At the Court at Kensington 
the 22th day of May 1729 
Present 

The Queens most Excellent Majesty, guardian of the Kingdom of Great Britain 
and His ]\Iajestys Lieutenants within the same 
His Royall Higness 
the Prince of Wales, Archbf of Canterbury. Lord Chancellor, Lord Privy Seal, 

21. Xew Jersey Archives Vol. IV, p. .388 following. 



IB 

1.(11(1 Slc\v;',r(l. 1.(11(1 (.'hainelirhiin. The Uiikes of Somerset, BoltdU. Kiitlaiul, Aryvill. 
Montiose. Kciil. Aiic-.istiT, Newcastle; The Earls of Coventry, Uraiitlmiii, CJodol- 
]ilii!i. Loiiddiin, Findlate, ilarchnioiit, Hay, L'xbridge, Sussex, W'estniorelaiid. Bvir- 
linjiton. i>t Sear'.ioroutih, ^'isoo^lllts Laiisdale. Cobhani, (S; Fahiiouth, l.ord Wihuiui;- 
ton, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chaiirelor of ye Kxche(ir. .Master of the Kolls. Sr Paul 
-Methueii, Henry I'clhaui. ]',s{i. 

Then follow the wherefore of the Act. and its full title, after which 1 (juote : 

■"Which act, together with a llepresentation from the Lords Commissioners 
for Trade and Plantations, ha\e been referred to the Consideration of a Committee 
(if His .Majesty's most H(ni(iuiable Pri\y Councill. The said Lords of the Com- 
mittee this day presented the said Act to Her Majesty at this Board \\ith their 
opinion that the same is jnojier to be a])pro\ed. Her ^lajesty taking the same 
into consideration was graciously pleased, with the advise of His Majesty Privy 
Council], to declare Her ap])rol)ation of the said Act : and pursuint to Her 
.'lajestys Royal! Plea-iire there upon I'Zxprcssed, the said Act is hereby conlirmed. 
linally Enacted, and llatifyed accordingly: whereof the (Jovernor or Commander 
in Chief of His Alajesty's said Cohmy of New Jersey for the time being, and all 
others whom it ma\ Concern are to take Xotice and <!overn themselves accord- 
ingly." (22). 

Vou see it re(juiri'd a ro\al funeral and a new coroii it ion liefore New Jerse\- 
(ould be legally divided. 

Thus elexen years and several months elapsed befoi'e this act returned to New 
Jersey with the royal approval, (ioxcrnor Hunter's term had ended, l^ewis JNIorris, 
as President of Council, had held the helm of State for put of a year, (governor 
liurnet had served a term of seven years, and John ]\lontgomerie, his successor, 
hid been chief Executive for more than a year liefore our precious act returns. 
[Meanwhile the Proprietors were compelled to accommodate themselves to the 
( xisting circumstances, lands were taken up. sold and n-old and for want of a 
better, the old division remained valid. 

But now the act is again in the Pro\ince. and by royal iii'.ndate all are in duty 
bound to govei-n themselves accordingly. It would seem but a siiii])le initter for 
ihe commissioners to dust oil' their commissions and hie tlieitiselves witii their 
surveyors to the ]dace of lieginning to begin the actual sur\-ey. P>ut (uie delay 
seems to have involved another and f(n' fourteen years we lind no reference in 
public documents to the matter. It uould seem as though the division line was 
kept in abeyance on account of the inability to settle the northern boundary line. 
The joint commission of HiSti. already referred to, accepted the mouth of the 
.Mackackemak oi- the Fishkill. now called the Xeversink creek, as the western end 
of the bonndaiy line. And though this point ])ro\ed to l)e many miles south of 
latitude foity-one degrees, forty minutes, and thus gave New York much territory 
not contemplated in the royal grant, still Allan Jarratt, surveyor for New York, 
protested against the acceptance of the line then run to JTudson's river, and hence 
no decision v,as reached. 

It was e\idcnt to all tlie inhabitants of the Eastern division of the Province 
that much land A\ould be thrown into West Jersey if the line were run to this 
point at the month of the T-^ish Kill. Hence they would naturally contend for 
the exact terms of the quintipartite indenture. How much of discussion was 
necessary to settle this point I am unable to discover. All I can alTirni is that 

22. Xew Jersey Archives Vol. V. ii. 243 following. 



19 

wlien in 174;] John Lnwronpo received his comniission and instruciions for the 
iU'tual (survey he was to hciiin at the point established by Keith at Little Egg 
Harbor, and run a random line in the direction of the north partition jjorat. it 
being suggested tliat the nearer lie guessed to the right direction, the less difficulty 
he would have in locating the true line. It was suggested further that from a 
comparison of former surveys with the variations of the compass the course 
should be N., nine degrees, forty-eight minuter W. This random line was to be 
carefully marked at the end of each mile, and v.as to be extended across tlu 
Delaware, through Pennsylvania until a point Avas reached the nearest to latitude 
f(jrty-one degrees, forty minutes on that river. Then the distance from this line 
to the nortli partition point was to be carefully measured, the direction the true 
measured line would take determined and the distance of each mile station from 
the corresponding mile station on the random line accurately computed. Then the 
true line was to be run from the north partition point, the distance from the 
random line station being frequently measured to insure accuracy. When the 
work was finished a map was to be prepared showing both the landoni and true 
line. (23). 

These instructions embodied in 20 i)oints and covering more than eight pages 
in Vol. VI, New Jersey Archives, are signed by John Hamilton and Andrew 
Johnson, but in what capacity is not stated. They have generally been attributed, 
and I presume correctly, to James Alexander, then Surveyor-general. 

I have seen no re])ort of Lawrence's actual work, but several maps state that it 
was d()n(> during the year 1743. By a curious delay similar to the one above 
recited, the appointment of Robert H. ^Morris, Lewis Johnson and Elisha Parker 
as commissioners to succeed three of the four originally appointed who had died in 
the interim, was not confirmed by King George II until ]\Iay 11. 174(). nearly 
three years after work was actually completed. 

It will be noticed that this line, in order to reach the north partition ])oint 
at 41 degrees 40 minutes crosses the Delaware below Dingman's Ferry, and 
extends for many miles through Pennsylvania territory. This is the explanation 
of a matter that has hitherto been a mystery to me. But when the X. Y. & N. J. 
boundary was finally determined in 1775 the mouth of the Fish Kill was accepted 
as the north partition point, and remains so to this day. In the one case the pro- 
vision of the Royal Grant and of the quintipartite indenture establishing this 
]wint at a branch of the Delaware was disregarded, and in the other the exact 
latitude 41 degrees, 40 minutes was disregarded and latitude 41 degrees, 21 min- 
utes, 22.6 seconds accepted. Hence the provision that the two lines should meet 
at one point has never been carried out, and the ideal East and ^^'est Jersey line 
still remains to be run. 

After all this controversy that resulted in the so-called Lawrence line of 1743. 
run just 55 years after the Coxe-Barclay agreement of 1688, nothing of great 
value was accomplished. The lands had been practically all taken up and located 
according to other natural or artificial boundaries as the case might be. so that 
when the line was run it crossed estates in such directions as to be of little or no 
value in subsequent descriptions, and except for the fact that it forms the dividing 
line between a few- to\\nishi])s in Sussex Co., it has at present no real existence 
fxcept on maps. Well may we apply to the whole affair the old Latin phrase. 
'■ Parturient montes. nascitur ridiculus nnis.'" Perhaps this is exjiressing a 

23. New Jersey Archives Vol. VI. p" 154 following. 



20 

judgment somewhat too severe. We must bear in mind the dillieulties of the 
situation and the inevitable dehiys due to the character of cohwial governments. 
Then we .shall be inclined to ]>raise the determination and perseverance that carried 
the matter to a successful conclusion in spite of delays and apparently unsur- 
mountable obstacles. It is easy for us to criticise what was done. It is more 
difficult to prove that we could have done better. 

There are a few obseivalions I wish to make before closing : 

1st. The Keith line of 1(>S7 is in one place I have seen spoken of as tlie line 
familiarly known as the t^cotch line. It extended directly toward this village. 
(Three Bridges) and there is nothing to indicate its termination upon the soutli 
bank of our stream unless it be the small bridge in the road skirting the stream, 
which bridge is considered the limits of two road districts. 

2nd. This line is spoken of in the 8chomp will IGGO and other papers of later 
date as the so-called Jjawrence's line. .lust how this happened it may be difficult 
to deteiniine. 

3rd. If the exact teiius of the ( 'oxe-Barclay agreement had been adhered to 
the point where this line reached the south side of the sti'eam below our village 
would have been the point from which the line would have continued northward 
toward the North Branch, and not the point nearly a mile and one-half east, 
which is the beginning of the line which now divides that portion of Hunterdon 
from Somerset county. 

P. S. — From a hasty examination of the report of the Elizabethtown Bill in 
Chancery T find I was mistaken in thinking the Coxe purchase extended to Three 
Bridges. A stndy of the original owners of this portion of our county still 
remains to l)e made. 



Supplement to Paper on the East and West Jersey Boundary Line. 

Since the above was prepared some additional infonnalion has come 
to hand that should find a place in this pa})pr. I refer to the judicial 
determination of the correctness of the Lawrence Line. 

Lawrence was employed by the East Jersey Proprietors, and his line 
was of necessity accepted by them as a final determination of the con- 
troversy, though by it less than one-half the Colony was comprised in 
the Eastern Division. From the date of its running, the Proprietors of 
East Jersey claimed all the unappropriated lands east of the line. The 
West Jersey Proprietors never formally accepted the line as a proper 
division of the Colony, though maps and surveys can be produced to show 
that individual proprietors, when giving title, made mention of the line 
as the eastern boundary of estates. This continued until the final 
settlement of the New York and New Jersey boundary line. "When in 1775 
the mouth of the Fish-Kill was accepted as the western termination of 
that line, the West Jersey Proprietors saw tliat it would be to their 
advantage to claim that this point should also be made the north 
partition point of the East and West Jersey line. They contended for 



21 

this point for many years, but never went so far as to have the line 
surveyed and marked. The controversy was not brought to an issue until 
1854 when Justice Potts of the Ocean County Circuit Court gave an 
opinion that seems to have settled the matter against the claims of West 
Jersey. The case before him is designated 

George Cornelius ) ( 

and ,^ vs. : James Gibertson. 

Christian D. Empson ) ( 

and involved the title to property recognized to be east of the Lawrence 
line. The plaintiffs, Cornelius and Empson, claiming title under 
warrant from the East Jersey Proprietors given August 27, 1835, and 
sought to oust the defendant, Gibertson, who produced title to the same 
property granted by West Jersey Proprietors as early as February 10^ 
1809. The case, when appealed to the Supreme Court, is reported in 1 
Butcher, pp 1-40. wherein the charge to the jury by Justice Potts is 
quoted in full. His argument is that, in the adjudication of the 
boundary, it is necessary to follow the exact language of the quinti- 
partite Deed of Division, which establishes the north partition point on 
the "northermost Branch of Delaware'' at latitude 41 40'. He asserts 
that the language of this deed does not require that this point shall be 
at the "mouth" of a "Branch" flowing into the Delaware, but merely 
locates it on the main stream which may properly be designated the 
"Northermost Branch" as distinguished from the Lehigh river, which may 
be considered the "Westermost Branch." Therefore the line surveyed by 
Lawrence from the South partition point to latitude 41° 40' on the 
Delaware is the true boundary line between East and West Jersey, and 
any grant of title by the West Jersey Proprietors east of that line is 
necessarily void so far as their right to give valid title is concerned. 

When the case was carried to the Supreme Court on the question of 
title by adverse possession for twenty years, the ruling of Justice Potts, 
as above summarized, was not seriously questioned, and consequently 
stands as a judicial determination of the facts in the case. Therefore it 
seems proper to claim that the correctness of the Lawrence Line has 
been affirmed by the Supreme Court of our State and that there is little 
propriety in questioning it. 

NOTE. For a brief statement of the boundary controversy, the 
reader is referred to a paper by Dr. George H. Cook, Surveyor General of 
East Jersey, read at the "Bi-Centennial Celebration of the Board of 
American Proprietors of East New Jersey," held at Perth Amboy, Tues- 
day, November 25, 1884, and published by authority of the Board. An 
important map accompanies the paper. 



